\begin{table}[htpb]\begin{center} \caption{Influence of the MIL on DIL's Number of Peers, OLS}\label{table:table2}\begin{tabular}{lccccc} \toprule
 \emph{Co-residence with:} &  (1) & (2) & (3) & (4) & (5) \\ \midrule & \multicolumn{5}{c}{A. Outcome: \# close peers in the village}  \\ 
Mother-in-law            &      -0.120** &      -0.114** &      -0.117** &      -0.128** &      -0.129** \\
                         &     [0.045]   &     [0.045]   &     [0.050]   &     [0.049]   &     [0.053]   \\
Father-in-law            &               &      -0.000   &      -0.020   &      -0.010   &      -0.011   \\
                         &               &     [0.039]   &     [0.041]   &     [0.039]   &     [0.039]   \\
\# other women $>$ age 18&               &               &       0.072** &               &               \\
                         &               &               &     [0.029]   &               &               \\
\# other 18-30 women     &               &               &               &       0.079** &               \\
                         &               &               &               &     [0.033]   &               \\
\# women 18-30 married women&               &               &               &               &       0.129***\\
                         &               &               &               &               &     [0.039]   \\
Control mean             &        0.61   &        0.61   &        0.61   &        0.61   &        0.61   \\


  & \multicolumn{5}{l}{B. Outcome: \# close outside peers in the village} \\  
Mother-in-law            &      -0.133***&      -0.138***&      -0.137***&      -0.133***&      -0.134***\\
                         &     [0.035]   &     [0.044]   &     [0.044]   &     [0.044]   &     [0.045]   \\
Father-in-law            &               &       0.003   &       0.010   &       0.007   &       0.005   \\
                         &               &     [0.045]   &     [0.045]   &     [0.045]   &     [0.044]   \\
\# other women $>$ age 18&               &               &      -0.028*  &               &               \\
                         &               &               &     [0.016]   &               &               \\
\# other 18-30 women     &               &               &               &      -0.032   &               \\
                         &               &               &               &     [0.020]   &               \\
\# women 18-30 married women&               &               &               &               &      -0.035   \\
                         &               &               &               &               &     [0.023]   \\
Control mean             &        0.36   &        0.36   &        0.36   &        0.36   &        0.36   \\
N                        &         671   &         653   &         653   &         653   &         653   \\
\bottomrule \\[-5ex] \end{tabular} \end{center} \begin{tablenotes} This table reports coefficients from specification (1). Each column is a separate OLS regression. The outcome variables in panels A and B are the DIL's number of close peers in the same village and the number of close peers that are not household members, respectively. In all cases, we control for the DIL's age, years of schooling, Hindu dummy, amount of land owned by the household, and fixed effects for her caste category (SC-ST, OBC, or other caste) and village. In addition, we gradually add an indicator for residence with the FIL, the number of other women in the HH that are above 18, in the 18–30 age group, and in the married 18–30 group, as controls across columns. Control mean refers to the dependent variable mean for women who do not live with their MIL. Robust standard errors in brackets are clustered by village. \sym{*}\(p<0.1\),\sym{**}\(p<0.05\),\sym{***}\(p<0.01\). \end{tablenotes} \end{table}
